| Taxi Driver Online http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/ |
|
| Trial by Media? http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=18779 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | captain cab [ Fri Mar 16, 2012 10:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Trial by Media? |
In last month’s issue I mentioned how the press appear to work, their disinclination to report on anything other than headline grabbing articles and very often their total lack of any journalistic quality or integrity. This follows a consistent line, I am sure many of you are regularly infuriated when reading a story with the headline “Taxi Rape” only to find a few paragraphs later, the driver involved was either a private hire driver or completely unlicensed. To some of you this is a pithy point to make, after all I am merely clarifying a minor point when the concern should (quite rightly) be with the unfortunate victim. I counter this with the view that such false headlines taint our trade and very often scare customers away, often into the arms of the private-hire trade. This mistrust of the press was highlighted whilst I was doing a little research for this month’s article; I am indebted to someone called Mr Al-Khames who made a freedom of information request regarding passenger complaints in Edinburgh via the website www.whatdotheyknow.com I stumbled upon his request by complete accident. On 14 January 2012, the Scotsman newspaper ran the headline “Complaints against cabbies quadruple during the last year”, the article then cited “Council officials received 196 complaints from the public in 2011, compared with 50 in 2010 and just 25 in 2009”. However, Mr Al-Khames request was answered as follows; 2009: Total number of complaints = 46 Total number of complaints against taxi drivers = 39 Total number of complaints against private hire car drivers = 6 Total number of complaints driver type not known = 1 2010: Total number of complaints = 114 Total number of complaints against taxi drivers = 84 Total number of complaints against private hire car drivers = 30 2011: Total number of complaints = 212 Total number of complaints against taxi drivers = 143 Total number of complaints against private hire car drivers = 69 The truth, as shown from Mr Al-Khames request throws a different light on the story, the original article actually contained incorrect figures (supplied by the local authority), and obviously, rather than check they ploughed on with the article regardless. It does however stand that the figures they quoted were false figures, figures that included private hire. It is instructive to note subsequent correspondence presumably from the Scotsman newspaper to Edinburgh Council has specifically requested ‘taxi’ – not private hire information. It must therefore surely follow that the Scotsman newspaper has some type of fixation with Edinburgh’s taxi trade. The figures in respect of private hire represent a 1050% increase in complaints, whereas in terms of taxi complaints the increase is 266%. Noam Chomsky wrote “The media are firmly imbedded into the market system. They are profit-seeking businesses, owned by very wealthy people (or other companies); they are funded largely by advertisers who are also profit-seeking entities, and who want their ads to appear in a supportive selling environment.” It is more or less a fact that Hackney Carriage companies very rarely use the press to sell their product, whereas private-hire companies, by their very nature, are deeply dependent upon the press to make the public aware of their services. The rather more mundane truth is that there are over 1300 cabs in Edinburgh, if each do 10 jobs per day, it represents well over 4.7 million journeys per year and last year there were slightly over 140 complaints, some of which were malicious. The truer figure is that for every 33,800 journeys there was a single complaint – hardly conducive to the article the Scotsman printed I’d have thought. Now who would possibly benefit from the taxi trade in Edinburgh being shown in a poor light? And why have private-hire figures been expressly dismissed? I leave the Edinburgh readership to decide. If I head south from Edinburgh, down to Luton, the press ran the furious headline “56 Luton taxi drivers have criminal convictions”, personally I would have been shocked if out of 1541 drivers there were only 56 convictions. But the article carried on, completely forgetting to advise how many actual Hackney carriage drivers were amongst the 56 (as the headline suggested) with a rather volatile story about a driver who was recently licensed. The paper stated; “At its last meeting, the council’s licensing panel granted a licence for an applicant who had been interviewed by police on four separate occasions in 2009 in relation to criminal damage, common assault, verbally abusing a police officer, being abusive towards a parking attendant, speeding, affray and other offences”. So fair enough, he was interviewed by police for criminal damage 3 years ago, not charged, interviewed (which is basically a talking to), he verbally abused a policeman and a traffic warden? WOW! This guy lived the dream. After applying for his license he was then made to appear in front of a licensing committee who decided, after convincing themselves the applicant was ‘fit and proper’ to be granted a license. Isn’t that how the system is supposed to work? Luton council even has unlike many types of council, a convictions policy to guide them. I’m not saying all licensed drivers in Luton are angels; there will very probably be a few rogues amongst them, but that merely makes the ‘licensed trade’ like every other profession, even like journalists. This carries on, you will be aware that local authorities on occasion – alongside VOSA and other agencies – carry out what the press like to describe and report as ‘swoops’. Sensationalised stories hit the press (and media in general) describing the vehicles stopped as ‘taxis’, these articles come with the almost obligatory library photograph of a TX type vehicle just to underline the point. This informs the readership graphically of the dodgy cabbies out there which are epitomised by the iconic vehicle. Invariably they also neglect to mention any private-hire cars being similarly stopped during these operations – although this information is easily found out by a short telephone call or email. Such obvious neglect shows not only the deep seated ignorance towards the matters they report on – but apparent media bias. They sometimes claim, by way of mitigating their lack of knowledge that the information they report is from a press release issued by either the police or local authority. Again, this displays breathtaking neglect and trust – you would be very often wrong in thinking they know enough to stray too far away from questioning the PR departments of government bodies. Suffice to say, such obvious mistakes are very rarely corrected. In Carlisle the local paper appear to have a long standing vendetta against the taxi trade (taxitalk March issue), following on from last month’s front page exclusive regarding the refusal of a wheelchair hire which seemingly merited the headline “Taxi driver accused of locking people in cab”, Carlisle’s finest toilet paper managed to trump this misleading headline with “IGNORANT – Cabbie is suspended after cream cake insult to disabled passenger”. The driver was subsequently suspended, and will face a 1 month suspension. Presumably we won’t see a “Taxi Driver and family suffer from malnutrition” headline in the local rag towards the end of the drivers’ one month suffrage. If the press were actually willing to learn (and that isn’t going to happen), they would actually know Hackney carriage drivers have never been governed by ‘codes of practice’, in actual fact there is no such thing, it’s a ‘made uppy’, so basically the charges laid down on the council papers were based on some imaginary piece of governance. Also, being ‘at variance’ with manufacturers recommendations, isn’t actually an offence (if that was the case every male in the country would be guilty each time they bought an electrical appliance) and that’s presuming he was actually shown by a manufacturer. Indeed, I’d wager a fair amount of my much diminishing income that they couldn’t tell me the force required to push a person of average size and weight up a ramp, in a TX taxi, in Newton Meters, as recommended by the Health and Safety Executive. But let us leave alone the vagarities of Carlisle City council’s licensing and enforcement policies, let us leave alone such paltry matters as health and safety regulations and concentrate on a meaty headline that will sell papers. Afterall, “Taxi drivers’ wit misses a customer” just wouldn’t sell lavatory paper would it? I would suggest all of you go on the internet and check your local authority websites. They are crammed full of obvious mistakes which often use the word ‘taxi’ to describe both the Hackney Carriages and private hire. Whilst I’m obviously concerned about these errors which will no doubt be explained away as minor, with perhaps even the excuse that the word ‘taxi’ is a ubiquitous expression. Leicester City Council’s website has the following; “The City Council’s Licensing Team issues licences for taxis (hackney carriages and private hire vehicles)” whereas Cardiff City Council’s title to the section goes; “Hackney carriage and private hire taxis”, Salford Council apparently have a ‘taxi licensing policy’ which on examination includes private hire (thanks to Dusty for pointing these out). Furthermore, Derbyshire police describe ‘private hire taxis’ when their propaganda departments diffuse information to the press. Could it be suggested these council’s have very little problem in capturing these same ‘taxis’ for illegally plying for hire, and a similar excuse pleading either ignorance or the ubiquitous expression would see a PH driver laughed out of court. Of course, such disregard (or downright laziness) from local authorities cannot be accepted in a country where private-hire drivers are regularly convicted of rape and serious assaults, towards passengers who illegally hire their vehicles. Especially considering the unfortunate victims frequently claim ignorance to whether or not the vehicle they entered was actually a taxi http://www.national-taxi-association.co.uk/?p=3027 |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|